[sailingparrot]

> We'll need to be rigorous about mitigating these risks and careful about what we choose to open source.

Here we go, predictably pulling the oldest trick in the book, just two weeks after it was reported [1] that the Superintelligence leadership was discussing moving to closed source for their best models, not for any risk mitigation reason, but for competitive reasons.

Also,

> As recently as 200 years ago, 90% of people were farmers growing food to survive. Advances in technology have steadily freed much of humanity to focus less on subsistence and more on the pursuits we choose. At each step, people have used our newfound productivity to achieve more than was previously possible, pushing the frontiers of science and health, as well as spending more time on creativity, culture, relationships, and enjoying life.

Yea about that... Sure Mark can choose to just fly on his private Hawaiian Island, or is Tahoe bunker and mess around with metaverse and AI and whatever he chooses. 99.9% of the population has an old regular job that they go to for subsistence. Michael from north dakota has not been doing bookeeping for SMEs because this was always the pursuit of his dreams. I also see no reason at all to believe we spend more time on creativity, culture, relationships or enjoying life than before. Especially that last point is in free fall over the last 50 years by the look every single mental well being metric around.

[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/14/technology/meta-superinte...

[insane_dreamer]

> spending more time on creativity, culture, relationships, and enjoying life

I wish this were true for the average person, but I'm not sure that it is.

[simonsarris]

> Here we go, predictably pulling the oldest trick in the book, just two weeks after it was reported [1] that the Superintelligence leadership was discussing moving to closed source for their best models, not for any risk mitigation reason, but for competitive reasons.

That's not pulling a trick, that's doing precisely what Zuck said he would do. In April 2024 Zuck on Dwarkesh said that models are a commodity right now, but if models became the biggest differentiator, that Meta would stop open sourcing them.

At the time he also said that the Model itself was probably not the most valuable part of an ultimate future product, but he was open to changing his mind on that too.

You can whine about that anyway, but he's not tricking anyone. He has always been frank about this!

[sailingparrot]

July 2024:

> Open Source AI is the Path Forward.

> Meta is committed to open source AI. I’ll outline why I believe open source is the best development stack for you, why open sourcing Llama is good for Meta, and why open source AI is good for the world and therefore a platform that will be around for the long term.

> We need to control our own destiny and not get locked into a closed vendor.

> We need to protect our data.

> We want to invest in the ecosystem that’s going to be the standard for the long term.

> There is an ongoing debate about the safety of open source AI models, and my view is that open source AI will be safer than the alternatives.

> I think it will be better to live in a world where AI is widely deployed so that larger actors can check the power of smaller bad actors [...] As long as everyone has access to similar generations of models – which open source promotes – then governments and institutions with more compute resources will be able to check bad actors with less compute.

> The bottom line is that open source AI represents the world’s best shot at harnessing this technology to create the greatest economic opportunity and security for everyone.

> I hope you’ll join us on this journey to bring the benefits of AI to everyone in the world.

> Mark Zuckerberg

Pulling the "Closed source for safety" card, once it makes economic sense for you, after having clearly outlined why you think open source is safer, and how you are "committed" to it "for the long term" and for the "good for the world", is mainly where my criticism is coming from. If he was upfront in the new blog post about closing source for competitive reason, I would still find it a distasteful bait and switch but much less so than trying to just put the safety sticker on it after having (correctly) trashed others for doing so.

https://about.fb.com/news/2024/07/open-source-ai-is-the-path...